KRISHAN SINGH GURBAX SINGH Vs. BHAGIU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . Rahul Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, who was the complainant before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Shimla (District Forum for short) very fairly and frankly submits that this case is identical both on facts and in law to CMPMO No.333 of 2004 decided on 17th July, 2006 and that if this Court considers it appropriate, it may pass in the present case also the same order which it had passed in the aforesaid case. Mr. G.C. Gupta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for

(2.) WHETHER reporters of the Local Papers are allowed to see the Judgment? the petitioner agrees to this course of action being adopted.

(3.) THE facts of the present case are identical as well as equally peculiar warranting the exercise of this Court's jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India because it is noticed by this Court in the present case and, with pain and anguish, that the District Forum rather than passing appropriate orders on the petitioner's application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure proceeded to issue non-bailable warrants against him despite the fact that he was duly represented before the District Forum even on 22nd September, 2004 by a counsel engaged by him. The objections in the execution application were also summarily rejected by the District Forum without passing a speaking order.